In this compilation of texts we'll address the coorelation between the
beliefs in the existance of deity constructs and the intelligence quotient
of the believer. We'll also provide suitable references for further
investigation into the subject.

I'll add that any negative connotations or remarks which I've ecountered
during the compilation of relevant text has been discarded out-of-hand
and I've only retained text which maintains some level of professional
decorum. Since the truth might easilly anger the theists who might run
across this web page, I would not deliberately increase their anger by
including unkind remarks and references.

4. Thomas Symington, 1935
Tested 400 young people in colleges and church groups. He reported,
"there is a constant positive relation in all the groups between
liberal religious thinking and mental ability...There is also a constant
positive relation between liberal scores and intelligence..."

9. Michael Argyle, 1958
Concluded that "although intelligent children grasp religious
concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion,
and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox
beliefs."

10. Jeffrey Hadden, 1963
Found no correlation between intelligence and grades. This was an
anomalous finding, since GPA corresponds closely with intelligence.
Other factors may have influenced the results at the U. of Wisconsin.

Niemi, Ross, and Alexander, 1978
In elite schools, organized religion was judged important by only 26%,
compared with 44% of all students.

Studies of Very-High-IQ groups.

1. Terman, 1959
Studied group with IQ > 140. Of men, 10% held strong religious
belief, of women 18%. 62% of men and 57% if women claimed "little
religious inclination" while 28% men and 23% of women claimed it was
"not at all important."

2. Warren and Heist, 1960
Found no differences among National Merit Scholars. Results may have
been affected by the fact that NM scholars are not selected on the
basis of intelligence or grades alone, but also on "leadership"
and such like.

3. Southern and Plant, 1968
42 male and 30 female members of Mensa. Mensa members were much
less religious in belief than the typical American college alumnus or
adult.

1. William S. Ament, 1927
C. C. Little, president U. of Michigan, checked persons listed in
Who's Who in America: "Unitarians, Episcopalians,
Congregationalists, Universalists, and Presbyterians are ... far more
numerous in Who's Who than would be expercted on the basis of the
population which they form. Baptists, Methodists, and Catholics are
distinctly less numberous."

Ament confirmed Little's conclusion. He noted that Unitarians, the least
religious, were more than 40 times as numerous in Who's Who as in
the U.S. population.

2. Lehman and Witty, 1931
Identified 1189 scientists found in both _Who's Who_ (1927) and
American Men of Science (1927). Only 25% in AM of S and
50% of those listed in Who's Who reported their religious denomination
despite the specific requests to do so, "religious denomination (if
any)." Well over 90% of the general population claims religious
affiliation. The figure of 25% suggest far less religiosity among
scientists.

Unitarians were 81.4 times as numerous among eminent scientists as
non-Unitarians.

3. Kelley and Fisk, 1951
Found a negative (-.39) correlation between the strength of religious
values and research competence. [How these were measured I have no idea.]

4. Ann Roe, 1953
Interviewed 64 "eminent scientists, nearly all members of the
prestigious National Academy of Sciences or the American Philosophical
Society. She reported that, while nearly all of them had religious
parents and had attended Sunday school, 'now only three of these men
are seriously active in church. A few others attend upon occasion, or
even give some financial support to a church which they do not
attend... All the otheres have long since dismissed religion as any
guide to them, and the church plays no part in their lives...A few are
militantly atheistic, but most are just not interested.'"

5. Francis Bello, 1954
Questionnaired or interviewed 107 young (<= 40) nonindustrial
scientists judged by senior colleagues to be outstanding. 87 responded.
45% claimed to be "agnostic or atheistic" and an additional
22% claimed no religious affiliation. For 20 most eminent, "the
proportion who are now a-religious is considerably higher than in the
entire survey group."

6. Jack Chambers, 1964
Questionnaired 740 US psychologists and chemists. He reported,
"the highly creative men [jft- assume no women included] ...
significantly more often show either no preference for a particular
religion or little or no interest in religion." Found that the
most eminent psychologists showed 40% no preference, 16% for the most
eminent chemists.

7. Vaughan, Smith, and Sjoberg, 1965
Polled 850 US physicists, zoologists, chemical engineers, and geologists
listed in American Men of Science_(1955) on church membership, and
attendance patterns, and belief in afterlife. 642 replies.

38.5% did not believe in afterlife, 31.8% did. Belief in immortality was
less common among major university staff than among those employed by
business, government, or minor universities. The contemporaneous Gallup
poll showed 2/3 of US population believed in afterlife, so scientists were
far less religious than typical adult.

From Beckwith's concluding remarks:

Conclusions
In this essay I have reviewed: (1)sixteen studies of the correlation
between individual measures of student intelligence and religiosity, all
but three of which reported an inverse correlation. (2) five studies
reporting that student bodies with high average IQ and/or SAT scores are
much less religious than inferior student bodies; (3) three studies reporting
that geniuses (IQ 150+) are much less religious than the general public
(Average IQ, 100), and one dubious study, (4) seven studies reporting that
highly successful persons are much less religious in belief than are others;
and (5) eight old and four new Gallup polls revealing that college alumni
(average IQ about 115) are much less religious in belief than are
grade-school pollees.

I have also noted that many studies have shown that students become less
religious as they proceed through college, probably in part because
average IQ rises.

All but four of the forty-three polls I have reviewed support the
conclusion that native intelligence varies inversely with degree of
religious faith; i.e., that, other factors being equal, the more intelligent
a person is, the less religious he is. It is easy to find fault with the
studies I have reviewed, for all were imperfect. But the fact that all but
four of them supported the general conclusion provides overwhelming evidence
that, among American students and adults, the amount of religious faith
tends to vary inversely and appreciably with intelligence.

There are no entirely satisfactory measures of intelligence, nor even
satisfactory definitions of what is to be measured. Intelligence seems be
something, though, and every tack we take in trying to catch the elusive
winds of thought carries us further toward workable definitions. Is
intelligence a good memory, the ability to sculpt, make a diving catch in
center field, play blindfold chess, construct sentences of "learned
length and thundering sound", or time a punchline?

SAT tests, IQ tests, success in life, measures of fame and esteem in peer
groups all fail to give that satisfying, final readout of how smart or
stupid any given person is. The evidence we have indicates that the more
we know about the real world, the less likely we are to believe in an
imaginary one.

ÿ
Someone else also added the following comment:

I would like to add a few opinions of my own concerning intelligence.

I doubt that innate intelligence varies much among individuals at birth.
One has wetware that either works or is defective in some way (mental
retardation). We see in various guises the effect of training on IQ, e.g.,
teaching 6th grade students the game of WFF 'n Proof raises measurements
of mathematical thinking almost a full standard deviation from the initial
measurement.

Intelligence seems to be learned (by most of the numerous studies I have
seen), and, prior to the concrete that sets in during the early 20s, can
be improved quite a lot. The earlier the process begins, the higher the
resultant IQ. I cannot remember them specifically, but I have read studies
which showed a disproportionate number of superior/genius among children
who's parents raised them with purposeful efforts to increase their ability
to think and solve problems.

The most famous case would be that of John Stuart Mill, who's father read
to him constantly from the time he was born, constantly teaching him, day
and night and in the child's sleep, even. John S. Mill could read Greek
at the age of 4, and remains the highest scoring writer on syntactic
analysis of sentence structure/vocabulary versus IQ.

In sum, the fatalistic concept that we are born with some preordained
intelligence level seems ill-founded. That it ceases to increase after
adulthood is part of the maturation process that freezes our brains into
a cognitive concrete before the age of 30. IMHO, if one has not become
"intelligent" before 20, nothing will help.

Are there highly intelligent Xians? Most certainly, but they do not
apply their reasoning to religion. Perhaps the best hypotheses to
explain the phenomenon of the intelligent professing deep religiosity are

1) Ignorance. Intelligence does not imply correct information.

2) Compartmented personality. The scientist and the prayer-maker
never meet.

3) Knavery. The statement of belief is a sham to serve another
purpose.

4) Fear of censure by friends and family.

5) Delusions or insanity.

Date: Fri 2 Sep 94 10:12

Don Geser:
DG> "Teenage girls who score highly on intelligence tests are
DG> less likely than others their age to be sexually active,"
DG> reports the Wall Street Journal.

David Rice:
Teenage students who score highest on intelligence tests are less likely
than others their age to be religiously active, reports:

Ann Roe, 1953, Interviewed 64 "eminent scientists, nearly all members
of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences or the American Philosophical
Society. She reported that, while nearly all of them had religious parents
and had attended Sunday school, 'now only three of these men are seriously
active in church. A few others attend upon occasion, or even give some
financial support to a church which they do not attend... All the otheres
have long since dismissed religion as any guide to them, and the church plays
no part in their lives... A few are 'militantly atheistic,' but most
are just not interested.'"

Terman, 1959, Studied group with IQ > 140. Of men, 10% held strong
religious belief, of women 18%. 62% of men and 57% if women claimed
"little religious inclination" while 28% men and 23% of women
claimed it was "not at all important."

Southern and Plant, 1968, 42 male and 30 female members of Mensa. Mensa
members were much less religious in belief than the typical American college
alumnis or adult.

Francis Bello, 1954, Questionaired or interviewed 107 young (<= 40)
nonindustrial scientists judged by senior colleagues to be outstanding.
87 responded. 45% claimed to be "agnostic or atheistic" and an
additional 22% claimed no religious affiliation. For 20 most eminent,
"the proportion who are now a-religious is considerably higher than
in the entire survey group."

Wiebe and Fleck, 1980, Studied 158 male and female Canadian university
students. The reported "nonreligious students tended to be strongly
intelligent and more intelligent than religious students."

There are many more studies: ask if you want to see their references.

Okay, here's the report we did on youth and religion. Before you read it,
you should know a few things:

1) We were under severe time restraints. The paper was written in
a marathon writing session over a weekend. The data, however, was
leisurely collected over the space of a few weeks. In short, it was
a standard term paper.

2) The intended audience was our advisors, and they had some strong
ideas about what the paper should have looked like (in form, not content).
We had to twist their arms to allow us to do this (the gifted program is
dispised anough at NP...).

3) We are not / were not statisticians. We are examining only 'obvious'
trends; we didn't have any agenda. (How could an atheist and a Mennonite
have a common agenda on this!?)

4) Looking at this paper, I feel like a moron. I'm ashamed enough
of it, don't rub it in... Remember, I was a junior in high school...

I found the raw data, but it is currently in AppleWorks DB format. I don't
have access to anything which will put it in a vanilla text file -- if
anyone does, please let me know, and I'll send it to you.

I have the questonairre, but when I looked at it, I remembered that we didn't
give that one out. It was manually typed out on a typewriter, but asked most
of the same questions (the essay question was a bit different). I'll talk
to my friend (who is now at Franklin and Marshall) about it when he comes
down here on Friday.

In a study of three hundred and fifty-four students attending North Penn
High School, a questionnaire was administered to ascertain the religious
beliefs of the student body. These questions will be addressed in the
following paragraphs:

What is the relationship between the religious beliefs of students
and that of their parents?

When there is a difference between the religions of a student's
parents, which parent exerts a greater influence over the beliefs of
their children?

What are the most common religions of the students tested?

What religions seem to lose the most members to atheism, agnosticism,
or religious indifference?

Have the students in the study had any religious questions or doubts?

Is there any correlation between intelligence and religious belief?

It was hypothesized that religious indifference would be prevalent in
members of all faiths. Personal experience of the authors suggests that
the pressures of living in the modern world would make it difficult to
sustain a strong faith. This society, with its emphasis on conformity and
materialism, would tend to create shallow and superficial personalities.
Today's adolescents were thought incapable of entertaining deep beliefs,
religious or otherwise.

* * *

Of the students questioned, twelve had stronger religious feelings than
their mother, and thirty-five had stronger feelings than their father.
There were sixteen who had stronger feelings than both of their parents.
Two hundred and ninety students had feelings that were weaker than those
of their parents. There was a pronounced trend in the difference of the
strength of religious feelings of mothers, fathers and students. Mothers
possessed a greater level of faith than fathers. Fathers, in turn, had
a higher level of faith than students (see graph).

Pastor Studer of Plains Mennonite Church felt that weak religious feelings
are to be expected in youth. However, he said, this often changes when
young adults marry or have their first child. Studer believed that this
new responsibility compels people to give thought to God. The demands of
adulthood spur a renewed interest in religion.

When the religion of the parents differed, the mother had a more profound
influence over the religion of the children than the father. Twenty-four
students followed their father's religion, while forty-seven followed the
religion of their mother. Dr. Mindrebo, principal of Calvary Baptist, was
saddened by this fact; he felt that it is the father's duty to lead the
zfamily in it's spiritual life. He said that in many cases, wives are
forced to lead the family in religion because the father is unwilling to
take such a role.

Of the students questioned,the Roman Catholic Church had the most members
(eighty-seven). Forty students reported their religion as being
"Lutheran Church in America", making it the second most common
church. On the questionnaire, thirty-nine students reported their religion
as "Christian Church". While the Christian Church was meant as
a specific denomination, most of those answering were probably confused by
the term, thinking that it meant simply being Christian in general.

So while "Christian Church" received the third highest number
of members, it was discounted. Twenty-four students reported themselves
as atheists. These four most common beliefs were followed by Judaism
(eighteen members);the Presbyterian Church, agnosticism, and people who
had no preference (all of which had seventeen members); the Baptist Church
(sixteen members); Hinduism (eleven members); the United Methodist Church
(eleven members); and the Methodist Church (ten members). These are the
top twelve religions reported by the survey.

There were five religions which lost a significant number of their teen-aged
members to atheism, agnosticism, or religious apathy: Judaism lost the
greatest percentage, with 27.8%, followed by the United Methodist Church
(27.2%), the Methodist Church (20.0%), the Lutheran Church (17.5%) and the
Roman Catholic Church (14.9%). All other religions were either too small
to be counted or lost no members.

Both Dr. Mindrebo and Pastor Studer felt that doubt is essential to
producing a religious faith strong enough to last all of one's life. They
both felt that this questioning begins in adolescence; Dr. Mindrebo
suggested that doubting may start in the later elementary school years but
could possibly occur later, even in high school.

Pastor Studer believed that questioning begins in junior high or high school.
He went on to say that to him, a person who has not had doubts about their
religion does not really belong to that religion. "All of their ideas
are borrowed," he said. No faith that is untested can be of great
value. Pastor Studer and Dr. Mindrebo each thought that by the time most
students reach high school, they would have given some thought as to the
validity of their religion's teachings.

In the study, there were clear lines between those who had questioned the
religious faith of their childhoods and those who had not. Some people
listed their religion as the same as their parents', listed their strength
of religious feeling as the same as their parents', and, in the space on
the questionnaire for writing about doubts, scratched "NO" in
large letters.

But many people indicated that their strength of religious feeling was less
than that of their parents or expressed the fact that they had or were
experiencing doubts about what they had been taught. The results of the
survey show that slightly less than half of the students have questioned
their religion. This would indicate that religious apathy is more prevalent
than either Dr. Mindrebo or Pastor Studer had believed.

Overall, there were only two trends the related religion to intelligence.
There were no Jews in 1.0 level classes, but there were fifty percent in
the gifted program. The percentage of Jews increased linearly with the
difficulty of the courses. The opposite was true of Catholics. Generally,
there was a higher percentage of Catholics in lower-level classes. This
may be due to many things, including economic background and attitude of
parents.

In addition to these two trends, there were some interesting facts
regarding atheism, agnosticism and being gifted. Of twenty-four atheists,
ten were gifted, and of seventeen agnostics, six were also gifted. This
does not seem significant until it is realized that there were only
eighty-seven gifted students questioned out of three hundred and fifty-four
total.

The results of the survey bear out the hypothesis that most youth give
little thought to matters such as religion. Many of the students belong
to their religion in name only; they do not bother to consider the
implications of what they believe. However, there was a sizable group of
students who did indicate that they had thought about religion, who were
not going through the motions of religion merely to please their parents.

Perhaps the number of those who think seriously about religion will
increase as students graduate, are thrust into the real world, and discover
that they need to develop their own beliefs.

I think the crux of the biscuit is that divine conceptions do not
really stem from intellect, but from individual psychology and
cultural logos.

As human civilization has developed we have conceived of gods that are
reflective of our logos. The western monodiety is anthropomorphic
like, but more abstract than, its predecessors. It has little in the
way of personality and is farther removed from the realm of everyday
existence than, say, Zeus was.

On the other hand, while the Greek gods were reflective of what was a
burgeoning civilization that made music, art, and wine, the monodiety
is reflective of the bands of desert nomads from which it came; it is
harsh and demanding, it is petty and possessive, and, in the final
analysis, vaguely psychotic.

As we all are composed of billions of cells, each of which comes into
being as an individual, exists for a time, and then dissipates into
its environment, so we are ourselves cells in larger systems. As our
cells cannot possibly conceive of a "human being," so we are
limited in our ability to hold holistic views of the higher-level systems
in which we exist. Our conceptions of gods are attempts to grapple with
these higher-level systems, and are limited approximations at best.
Humans believing in an anthropomorphic god is rather like cells
believing that god is a cell, separate but similar to themselves.

>The latest issue of _NCSE Reports_ (from the National Center for Science
>Education, P.O. Box 9477, Berkeley, CA 94709) discusses a December 1991
>Gallup Poll which asked Americans whether or not they agreed with the
>statement that "Man was created pretty much in his present form about
>10,000 years ago." 47% agreed, 49% disagreed. Of those who disagreed,
>80% said that they believed in God.

Jim, was the data more specific as to which "version" of God,
that the 80% beleived in? Or was it just stated as "they beleived
in "a" God?

>(_NCSE Reports_ also points out that "people with more education
>and income rejected this statement [the one quoted above] twice as
>often as poorer, less educated respondents.")

A couple implications come to mind on this: 1) education removes some
of the myth's surrounding man's need for a belief in a higher being,
with emphasis on science and philosophy as the tools by which this is
accomplished; 2) education, with income following, brings us to a state
of self-sufficiency, therefore the concept of relying on a
"all-powerful" creator who will provide us with sustenance,
is transferred to the individual.

Is it education alone or the monetary success that education can bring
that causes someone to either reject previously accepted beliefs or
not consider a belief system at all?

Some evidence that it may be the former (education) which is more
significant is that most studies of education level and religiosity
find an inverse correlation. (For a summary of 43 such studies
done between 1927 and 1982, see Burnham P. Beckwith, "The Effect
of Intelligence on Religious Faith," Free Inquiry 6(2):46-53.)

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page.